COMES NOW Stephanie Barnes Taylor (Taylor), by and through the undersigned counsel of record, and files this her Joinder to the request for Disqualification of Trial Judge, Application for Extraordinary Relief and Motion to Stay filed by Singing River Health System, and in support would show unto the Court the following:
-
Taylor has attempted to stay neutral while other parties engage in procedural volleys in this and other ancillary litigation in state court and parallel litigation in federal court.
-
Without question, the subject of this and the various related litigation involves substantial sums of money and affects hundreds if not thousands of individuals. The various litigation is subject to intense media scrutiny, strong emotions and unbridled speculation fueled by bloggers and an uninformed public.
My attitude is since the Glam Queen invited us to dance we may want to take her up on it. Meantime here are a couple of links:
The Educated Sheep Of The Ivy League ~ Jane Clayson
Don’t Send Your Kid to the Ivy League The nation’s top colleges are turning our kids into zombies ~ William Deresiewicz
Harvard Student Tells World that Harvard, does in fact, suck ~ Eve Binder
Marilyn Monroe or Marlyn Manson? You decide. I am tickled Stephanie is here for another blogging. I do wish she would spend her downtime writing a book about what has gone on behind closed doors at the Singing River Hospital System. She knows all of the secrets and with her doctor husband’s input a total picture could be provided. Come on Stephanie, lets BOOKgie!!! I also would like to add that I think the top secret information provide to the Ms. Supreme Court under seal by the attorneys for SRHS is possible proof that Trail Judge Harris is a closet blogger. We have seen that show before over NOLA way. I Wonder if Judge Harris has been to the International Hotel recently ?
Holy Hairy Harvard Black-afro Barbie Babe Batman :
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=barbie+girl+video+with+lyrics&FORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=DA6072F99861D06C707BDA6072F99861D06C707B
Gee, she went to the outstanding law school that our beloved president attended. I bet they took Transparency Government 101 that all the dedickated public servants take to learn how to do ONE-WAY executive actions to effect CHANGE on our Constitutions over which brave and courageous soldiers have bled and laid their lives down for throughout the years.
“You are a Barbie Girl in a Barbie World – you can brush my hair, undress me everyway, imagination is your creation ” –
but Barbie please check in with the White House soon cause they could possible use your Harvard education to effect CHANGE……
I had never heard of her, so I looked her up on the MS Bar website – she is suspended for non-payment of dues – what the ??? And she was licensed in Texas in 1997, but her ticket has been pulled there, too. I then did a case reporter search – nothing anywhere – there is another Stephanie (Anne) Taylor in MS, but that is not this Stephanie Barnes Taylor. So I did a Google search and found this from a Tougaloo College event:
Stephanie Barnes Taylor is the Chief Compliance Officer for Singing River Health System in
Jackson County, Mississippi. As a member of the Senior Executive Team, she has
responsibilities that impact every facet of hospital operations. She has direct responsibility for
risk management, contracts, and compliance.
(Ah – this may explain her being sued with the rest of the pack)
She attended Mississippi State University (1990 – 1992) and graduated summa cum laude from
Tougaloo College in 1994 with a Bachelor of Arts Degree in English. She received her law
degree from Harvard Law School in 1997.
Stephanie is actively involved in her community and serves on several boards. She was
selected by the Gulf Coast Business Council for the 2010 Masters Program. She currently cochairs
the Education Committee of the Gulf Coast Business Council Board. In 2009, she was
named by the Sun Herald and Journal of South Mississippi Business as one of South
Mississippi’s Top 10 Business Leaders Under 40, Class of 2008. She is a graduate of the
Leadership Jackson County Class of 2006. She is a member of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority,
Inc. and has held leadership positions at the local, regional, and national level. She is currently
the President of the Junior Auxiliary of Biloxi-Ocean Springs. In 2005, Mrs. Taylor was
appointed to the Governor’s Commission on Recovery, Rebuilding & Renewal, Health and
Human Services Committee Chair where she served as the Physician Subcommittee Chairman.
Mrs. Taylor was responsible for drafting the subcommittee report to be incorporated into Health
and Human Services Report submitted to the Governor’s Commission established by
Mississippi Governor, Haley Barbour.
She is the Chief Excellence Consultant for The Fruition Group, LLC, a company that specializes
in personal excellence, leadership and strategic planning solutions. She is also a published
author on several leadership topics and writes short fiction.
She has been married to Dr. Jerrod Taylor since 1995. They have 2 sons, Nicolas, 12,
and Marcus, 9.
And from MGCCC’s blurb on announcing her appointment to its board:
“…board member of the Mississippi Coast Endoscopy Surgery Center, *** the Singing River Hospital System Employee Retirement Trust *** and Rebuild Jackson County…”
UM, WHAT? The Hospital’s GC and “Chief Compliance Officer” is on the board of the ERT and a joint venture between SRHS and some of its doctors and all while the outside counsel, Roy Williams and son / assorted Dogan & Wilkinson partners, who themselves are involved with all sorts of “business arrangements” with various doctors (many of which are “interesting”), are just standing around not noticing the entirety of all of this? And while they are “helping” another client, the City of Ocean Springs, keep out a medical clinic (and got the client popped big in the process)? Well, good luck selling THAT story. Now THIS explains why she is now a Defendant in this mess.
There may be good explanations for it all, here is what the record seems to say: a 1997 Harvard-graduated lawyer who got a Texas bar card in 1997 and was an associate with Jenkens and Gilchrist (UH-OH!! – it’d take too long to fully explain, but the firm is no more and several partners are in the pen for hinkey stuff – just Google them) until 2004, when she comes to SRHS (with no MS bar card until 2005), where she was general-counseling, compliance-officering, board-membering and “excellence consulting” away during the time the shit is hitting the fan. And her MS bar card was suspended for non-pay, so she is now the full-time “Chief Excellence Consultant for The Fruition Group, LLC, a company that specializes in personal excellence, leadership and strategic planning solutions” as well as “President of Fabulous University,” where she uses “her gift of vision, inspiration and, compassionate confrontation, Stephanie Barnes Taylor equips and empowers women to find their fabulous!” I don’t think that good ol’ Fab U is gonna cover the shortfall in the pension…
No, I am not making any of this up – it took about 10 minutes of searching to find it.
Oh, and by the way, might as well post this here – the “savior” trustee, Scott Taylor? Turns out he is Lester Tuck’s stepson-in-law or something (Lester Tuck being a past admin of the hospital), and if I remember correctly combined with what I’ve been told, Tuck’s involvement spanned Mack Cumbest, Lum Cumbest, the PERS separation, the Dodson v. Singing River BS, and into the early stages of the current mess.
All I can say is, SRHS folks, you’re screwed. I hate to say it or see it, but it’ll take seventeen miracles to unfork-up this totally forked-up mess, and as long as anyone remotely connected to any of this small-town dumbass back-scratching trough-scarfing remains connected, there will be no miracles. Make your peace with it, get what you can, and try to enjoy life in spite of it.
Nunn Yabidnez, You are getting my vote for best commentor of the year when Slabbed passes out the annual Bloggy Awards. You have been providing some excellent info for all to read. Please keep up the good posts, which I really enjoy. Stephanie will probably use some of the information on her new resume. You, my friend, are unbridled informer of the public.
Nunn Yabidnez, You are getting my vote for best commentor of the year when Slabbed passes out the annual Bloggy Awards. You have been providing some excellent info for all to read. Please keep up the good posts, which I really enjoy. Stephanie will probably use some of the information on her new resume. You, my friend, are unbridled informer of the public.
Nunn, Thank you for your research. Some of us old people are slow on the draw. This SRH deal reminds me in numerous ways of DMR. There were so many cronies, kin and political people involved (and still are) that it would take a Philadelphia lawyer to untangle the mess.
It looks like SRH Retirees and employees are looking at a long-term bunch of crap with no end in sight. I just hope and pray Senator Wiggins keeps the pressure up on these crooks.
All great comments and through investigation. I didn’t know about her non-payment of dues or what exactly happened in Texas but my spidey senses were tingling.
I am just speculating here, mind you , just a gut feeling but it’s interesting that Stephanie has placed her dog in this fight all of a sudden. Could it be maybe that the FBI has gotten a little too close in their investigations. I mean she did after all conduct quiet a bit of her personal business on SRHS time. Heck she even solicited for her personal business using her SRHS email. She sent “invitations” to Srhs employees to pay $1200 each to attend her Fab U classes. Looks to me like she and The Williams’ Gang have gained a lot with their incestous relationship with SRHS.
In Hollands defense, at least he had the balls to get rid of The Queen of Legal Services. He knew she would be a huge liability
The Pension Fiasco is the tip of this iceberg. It was a peck of what all has truly been going on all these years. Too much I scratch your back if you scratch mine
And as far as the blogging , it’s the only outlet the citizens of the USA have where the feel they can finally speak up and not lose their jobs at SRHS
Thank God for Slabbed and other outlets
Hail for our 1st amendment rights!!!!!!
jctaxpayer:
I gotts to wonderin’ if all the SRHS employees who paid $1,200 to attend Barbie’s Fab University classes were rewarded with any pay raises , promotions or other freebies…?
Other than a world-wide prized and recognized Fab University dip-loma seems to little old stupid me if I had paid $1,200 to attend special ed classes I would want such a diploma to benefit me in some way in my job .. wink, wink
Wonder who would have the attendance roll of all the names of employees who graduated to compare if and when these select Fab graduates benefited in salary, promotion, etc..?
Might be a good deposition question to ask if and when professor Barbie gets her exclusive interview wit da’ FED graduate recruiters, sorry I meant prosecutors.
Gotta wonder how many Fab U fees were approved for reimbursement by SRHS to employees of SRHS.
I have had the pleasure of meeting Stephanie Taylor at one of the Gulf Coast Business Council functions and must say she was very charming. By all appearances she is engaging and well spoken. I feel her involvement in the hospital problems will end up being one job she regrets ever having. The many conflicts pointed out by others involving what appears to be most of the past management and trustees must be untangled. Ms. Taylor’s move to another state may be good timing for her family. I wish her the best.
Well fellas, there were a few folks who took them classes from Quennie, but I believe they were all on company time and they didn’t have to pay. BUT…
Yes, several of her “graduates” got promotions. One was the Go-go Dancer, and several were Nursing VPs aka as panty droppers back in my day.
Does one have anything to do with the other ? Ehhh- maybe. Regardless the Queen did develop the class for SRHS and then turned around and marketed it for her own profitability But as I’ve said befure I’m no college graduate (ESP not a Havard man) but, sounds lil sum thing about intellectual property not to mention the ethics questions
Ole Quennie will land on her feet in Huntsville finding someone else to throw phones and ink pens at and another putz assistant to buy her them beautiful Katherine Pessco bracelets and follow her around like a chineese pug dog.
The truth hurts but the truth is the truth and nothing but the truth so help me God
If true, none of this would surprise me.
Grandpa Grimm,
Yo’ done said some of toes Fab University graduates were “…nurse VPs aka panty droppers..”
We’re dem da’ ones dat wore dem tight tee shirts wit’ da’ big F U on da’ front?
Tanks fo’ another TruTv excitin’ ” bedtime story” and here’s hopin’ yo’ have a wet dream two
I cannot vouch for the Queens actual educational credentials but as a college graduate, I have a high amount of respect for Ivy League schools and would consider them a prime chioce. Not every school is perfect but I believe pound for pound, they have the rest beat. However, they do have a history of playing the minority game to ensure a diverse population of students as I am told. So, this could be one of their tokens.
The ole dirt hauler has been busy earning a living, unlike the SRHS Administration and board of trustees.
Recently while delivering loads of dirt to the National Guard site behind the hospital I have been able to catch up on the dirt at SRHS.
Sources state that Mrs. Taylor was a package deal because of SRHS hiring her doctor husband. SRHS is famous for this practice. Many of the public would vomit in their mouths if they knew the deals that go on at this organization.
Another one of these deals was with Dr. John J. McCloskey, neurosurgeon. No one will ever question Dr. McCloskey’s credentials as an excellent neurosurgeon, but should question the deal he negotiated with SRHS. That leads up to my problem with the Aguilar’s, Cisco and Kitty. Past employees of Dr. McCloskey who became employees of SRHS because of Dr. McCloskey’s practice being purchased by SRHS.
The Aguilars are very vociferous as it relates to the SRHS retirees receiving a bad deal. Yes, the retirees have received a bad deal. The problem is how the Aguilars qualify as a SRHS retiree. They did not earn their retirement with SRHS; they were credited with their years with Dr. McCloskey. Retirees, you should not be happy with this! Just one of the many bad deals SRHS has entered into.
Back to Mrs. Taylor, everyone at SRHS knew of her escapades, contracts were always behind and many of her staff was never at work. Some were working on a higher degree during working hours and continued to be paid.
Nothing has changed at SRHS, quite evident by the “Casino Dancer” being given the job as Director of Patient Access. She has no experience or education that qualifies her for this position. Yes, I know, she has other talents. You see, the SRHS Administration must keep certain individuals employed and paid well to ensure they do not turn over on them.
Billy Guice, I am not sure why you have not completed your investigation and uncovered the dirt. Hell, I can do while holding down two jobs! Oh, you would have to want to uncover the dirt.
Well, the dirt hauler must go. A lot of dirt to be hauled in the spring.
First off before you go name dropping get your fasts straight. Cisco and Kitty did not get the roll over any time from the their length of time with neurosurgery. They have 11.5 years of retirement so barely vested. If SRHS sticks by the offer of ¨if an employee has retired in the last 3 years then they will be treated like a current employee and receive only what they have put in + very small interest:. So they do not have to be on the picket line fighting for you and every other person at SRHS. They could take the money and run. So please get your facts before publishing a lie.
First off before you go name dropping get your facts straight. Cisco and Kitty did not get the roll over any time from the their length of time with neurosurgery. They have 11.5 years of retirement so barely vested. If SRHS sticks by the offer of ¨if an employee has retired in the last 3 years then they will be treated like a current employee and receive only what they have put in + very small interest:. So they do not have to be on the picket line fighting for you and every other person at SRHS. They could take the money and run. So please get your facts before publishing a lie.
Dirthauler
Did all the physician practices that SRHS purchase get the same deal re employees and retirement that Dr McCliskey’s staff received?
For example Drs Donald Groff and Williamson, Dr Terry Millette, Dr Kesterson just to name a few.
We’re these new employees or their previous employer required to “buy in” to the pension plan or were they just enrolled into the plan fortune served with their previous employer?
Along with many other bad choices, this decision also played a role in the employee pension plan debacle. I’m so glad that the plan had “real” trustees who took their fiduciary responsibility to the beneficiaries of the plan so seriously.
Someone in an earlier post stated that the employees and retirees were “just screwed.” That is probably a fair statement. I might be screwed but I am not going to just roll over and take it!! Every last person who played a role in this travesty must pay and I won’t rest till that day comes!
http://www.sunherald.com/2015/03/14/6123236/risky-business-srhs-retirement.html
Looks like Gregg Buckalew, formerly with Arthur Anderson, the accounting firm that was put out of business for criminal activity with Enron and several other companies (see above re: Jenkens and Gilchrist, also busted for criminal activity, and Ms. Taylor having been there) is gonna have some explaining to do. For the conspiracy types, Buckalew was handlng SRHS long before Taylor arrived (actually, from what I understand, well before she got out of college), so no, she didn’t get SRHS involved with him. What I’d want to know is why SRHS trustees let someone with a resume like Buckalew’s continue to put the pension money into these kinds of investments. Or really, why they were even allowing him near the money. I’m not accusing him of anything, just that it would seem that a prudent trustee might have a few reservations about all of this. Unless, of course, some of those very high fees were finding its way to “interesting” places.
Does anyone know what bank(s) were/are used? Does anyone know if Greg Cronin and/or Bob Farve (now with Roy Williams’ Charter Bank, formally of Wachovia / Wells Fargo and sued by Wachovia for allegedly stealing clients when they helped start Charter) have anything to do with the SRHS pension bank account(s)?
Hey Nunn! Thanks for dropping that name. Full name actually J. Gregg Buckalew apparently.
Look at these links. Page 23 in particular of the second.
http://www.pionline.com/article/20020624/PRINT/206240703/landing-on-their-feet-andersen-partners-jump-ship
http://www.securitiesmosaic.com/uploaded/resourcecenter/ADV2B/FiduciaryVest.pdf
I feel obliged to respond to the misinformation spread by “dirt hauler” on a recent post as it relates directly, specifically and personally to my wife and me. There’s no need in our case for pseudonyms, as we have nothing to hide or fear from the light: we are Cisco and Kitty Aguilar, proud employees of Dr. John McCloskey for over 23 years before our office was purchased by SRHS on 08/01/2003. Since then we worked another 11 years until our joint retirement from SRHS on 9/19/2014. Our seniority with Dr. McCloskey was carried over with the start date of 1/1/1982, giving us a total each of 32 ½ years of credited continued service to the system.
From the retirement plan point of view, however, our start date is 11/2/2003, 90 days after we became SRHS full time employees. We, as everyone else in the plan, were forced to contribute 3% of our payroll and we did so for the entire time we were active on the plan. There was no special giveaway at any point. After 10 years we became vested and when we retired in 2014, we were promised the corresponding lifetime benefit to the 11 years we contributed, not a penny more or less.
Actually, because of the look back clause embedded on the plan termination process, we found ourselves in the interesting situation, shared by many at SRHS, that upon termination we would receive nothing out of the hospital contributions. No lump sum for us other than what we paid in plus a nominal interest. This is utterly unfair as it can be easily demonstrated.
So, yes, “dirt hauler”, we did earn our retirement with SRHS and we fully qualify as SRHS retirees, as our previous years of employment with Dr. McCloskey were never credited toward our retirement benefits.
We have therefore the same rights and obligations that any other retiree and we can, should and will be as “vociferous” as we please while defending what is justly ours, in as much as we have earned every bit of it, exactly like every other SRHS retiree.
In conclusion, while I always appreciate the contributions of Slabbed’s commenting community, especially when uncovering previously hidden truth, unfounded and baseless dirt as in this particular case cast a dark shadow of lies and malicious gossip over the validity of what’s being posted here.
I’m afraid that the mild pain and discomfort of Kevin’s finger in my b hole is gonna be a fond memory after the fisting done. Get ready y’all, it’s coming.
I’m ready to hear some names! Some of these administrators are getting more a$$ than a public toilet. One in particular makes panties hit the flo when he walks in a room. At his age, I’m impressed!
Nunn, dirt hauler- keep it up
Dirt hauler, you owe a big ole apology to Cisco & Kitty Aguilar. Let’s see if you can be man up & do it! If this is what you call the “dirt” you need to go out of business. Shame on you!!!
Mr. Aguilar please accept my apology for stating you did not earn your 11 years. Compared to those who severed twice the amount of years and are being screwed (Jackson County Supervisor, Barry Cumbest).
However, what is amusing is that some of you do not see how absurd it is for the Aguilars to have received over 20 years of service with SRHS, by the signature of a pen. These kinds of deals have plagued SRHS and have made them unprofitable.
Dirt hauler, are you ignorant & can not understand Mr. Aguilar’s response. He did not get 20yrs credited as a retiree from SRHS. I am sooo proud of him for fighting for us retirees, while he will receive a lot less (11 yrs) than many of us. He & his wife, Kitty, are vested & deserve their fair share of what is owed to them.
I have a question re Mr Agulilar’s response re receiving credit for all the years he worked when Dr McCloskey was in private practice.
According to the pension plan, if the an employee retired before the age of 65 WITHOUT 30 years of credited service they would not be able to draw a pension.
Having said that, if the Aguilars are not 65 and are drawing a pension based on their total credited years of service with Dr McCloskey before his practice was bought and afterwards, then yes they enjoy a benefit that former retirees and current employees do not!
This is not personal. This goes for anyone who might fall into this category. Everyone appreciates what the Aguilars have done in support of keeping the pension plan alive.
I believe the Agulilars have previously directly addressed your question.
As to second guessing business decisions made by management, absent some glaring conflict of interest the legal standards are a pretty tough nut to crack.
http://www.jgcg.com/article/bus_judge_rule.htm
Through time here on comments I have seen commenters try to divide the current employees from the retirees and now the retirees from each other. It is an interesting dynamic to say the least.
The only people that can sink the retirees are the retirees themselves.
That said when I speak of conflicts of interest these divides illustrate exactly what I am speaking of. The second Chris Anderson the CEO made the decision to stop funding the pension trust, Chris Anderson the CEO became fundamentally interest conflicted with Chris Anderson the Pension Trustee. Meantime we have the specter of Dogan and Wilkinson representing SRHS and the Pension Trust despite the fundamental conflict between the Health System and the Pension Trust that it has abused.
The pension trust must have an independent trustee and legal representation to properly assert the legal rights of the participants whose have suffered from the massive breach of fiduciary duty. Currently they have neither and that bothers me considering how long as this saga has been playing out.
Cisco and Kitty:
Just a few questions I hope you good folks can answer. if not maybe other SRHS employee/retiree Slabbers can address and produce answers :
#1) When Dr. Mc Closkey sold his PRIVATE practice to SRHS did he tell you that said sales agreement between he and SRHS specifically in legal words was going to back date your service into the pension plan to the very first day you all started work with him ? In connection with your answer if there were legal words in sales agreement that you were retirement beneficiaries of such agreement did you all sign any papers with SRHS in support of said agreement? Or was this a personal promise Dr. Mc Closkey made at time of sale which was later fulfilled by a separate declaration of the Pension System Board?
#2) Did both of you contribute your own funds into the pension system on a prorated basis for the years of salaries both of you earned for the years you worked in his PRIVATE practice? And if so, at the time your backdated monies were contributed was there a legal document provided by the SHRS Pension System at that time which guaranteed your prorated monies were matched in some % way by the pension System?
Seems to me if Dr. Mc Closkey had sold his practice to a PRIVATE doctor or clinic instead of a PUBLIC ( politicized ) entity like SRHS he could never have secured a back dated guaranteed retirement plan for his PRIVATE workers.
It seems you all got a sweet heart deal on the backs of the PUBLIC employees who actually worked for the PUBLIC hospital for 30 continuous years and if other such similar deals were done its no wonder the system went belly up.
It also seems you all got the best of both worlds. By that I mean you probably received a higher PRIVATE wage ( most PRIVATE professions generally pay higher PRIVATE wages and less benefits where PUBLIC employees get less salary but great benefits including better pension plans) while you worked for Dr.Closkey. But you all later took these same higher PRIVATE wages and probably contributed into SHRS system with a certain percent of matched funds by the SRHS Pension System ( which matching funds come from the POOL of contributed funds by PUBLIC employees and SHRS) .
In another analogy, our president’s recent executive action gives social security benefits to illegal aliens who have never paid into to the system long enough on the front end to be entitled to receive them on the back end. Social pension systems are founded on an initial financial feasibility formula and to change this formula for every Tom, Dick, Harry, Cisco and Kitty brings disaster to SRHS but will bring similar disaster to our politicalized national social security system.
lockemuptight: For the record, until they posted here, I’d never heard of the Aguilars, so I have no idea what their situation might be. That said, your point that special treatment is not a good thing is certainly a reasonable one, but if anyone thinks that a few folks getting what MIGHT be termed a “sweetheart” deal as to their own potential retirement payments from the pension is what got the pension into the total mess it is in, you are mistaken. And I have to say, I’m not clear as to what “Cisco” explained – “Our seniority with Dr. McCloskey was carried over with the start date of 1/1/1982, giving us a total each of 32 ½ years of credited continued service to the system.” “From the retirement plan point of view, however, our start date is 11/2/2003, 90 days after we became SRHS full time employees.” What is the relevance of the 32 1/2 years, or, the 11/2/2003 “start date?”
But whatever they may be getting, and only for the sake of argument, this or that individual (or even multiple individuals) got something more than others with similar “in-plan” time because they were credited with time employed by a merged entity AND that wasn’t PROPERLY addressed by the merger/takeover agreement, that wouldn’t lead to the situation the plan is in now. Given the amount the plan is underfunded versus the amount (possibly) “over-drawn” by the “underfunded” payee, you’d be talking a mere “rounding error” in the overall health of the pension fund. Plus, that comparatively slight possible overdrawing now wouldn’t effect things on day one anyway, it would take many years of such a relatively small “unequal, underfunded payout” to build up to even a measurable amount in the pension’s corpus. It is simply mathematically impossible to get 100-plus million in the hole in 8-10 years by overpaying even a couple of million a year, even if there were such an overpayment AND there was no more being added to the corpus.
As I read what has been posted, the Aguilars did contribute for 11 years and for some of those years, SRHS contributed its share, too. They have only been getting something for about 6 months. Even if one wanted to assume the absolute worst (and there seems to be no reason, not even a hint of reason, to assume that), the idea that the Aguilars’ retirement payments (even if there were 50 of them, all getting similarly “overpaid”) caused this mess is so far beyond ridiculous you couldn’t see it from the peak of Mount Insanity. And more importantly, all the gossip about who was screwing who doesn’t mean sh!t as far as the pension is now – even if 100, 1,000 or 10,000 “friends of management” currently on the payroll might have eventually been eligible for triple benefits sometime in the future – enough to crash the pension on the first day of payout to them – it still wouldn’t have gotten things in the shape it is currently.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: if anyone wants to go after folks, it isn’t (and wasn’t) who might be getting X dollars of retirement payments from the pension that got things where they are, it was who was running it and what “benefits” they may have gotten from running it “a certain way” that got it where it is.
Before any Slabbers say I’m confused let me quote exactly what Cisco and Kitty stated above in their comment:
” Our SENIORITY with Dr. McCloskey was CARRIED OVER with the start date of 1/1/1982, giving us a total each of 32.5 years of CREDITED CONTINOUS SERVICE TO THE SYSTEM” ( caps emphasis mine).
Whether they retro-contributed into the SHRS Pension Plan according to their ‘ …. SENIORITY of CREDITED CONTINOUS SERVICE TO THE SYSTEM ‘ from 1982 to 2003 is not necessarily a smoking gun in and of itself. But the word SENIORITY and phase CREDITED CONTINOUS SERVICE TO THE SYSTEM I believe may well be ?
In other words, it sounds like Cisco and Kitty ( and I’m assuming they were both over 65 yrs old at retirement application) worked PRIVATELY for 20+ years and after 11 years retired in a PUBLIC pension plan with a faux 20+ CREDITED CONTINOUS SERVICE TO THE SYSTEM. There seems to be a contradiction inherent here.
Maybe another retiree who worked 30 continuous years at SRHS and who is 65+ years old needs to comment on the fairness of Cisco and Kitty and not just the fact they are fighting for retirements which may be based on an unfair applications of SRHS’s pension plan.
Should Cisco and Kitty get all their contributed monies back plus interest? Absolutely
But there is a question whether they should receive a life-time pension plan payments ? And that was the basis for my above questions directed to them.
It is no secret that the employees of practices that were purchased got preferential treatment. Not only were they paid more, they begin to accrue PTO at a much higher ratel than other employees by using their private practice job as credit. So, a person who worked for Dr. Williamson for 20 years before joining SRHS, begins accruing benefits as if they had worked for SRHS for 20 years
Instead of being a new employee. Legal and HR approved this. One also needs to look at some the physicians who were employed as “full-time” and only worked part-time hours. Again, approved by legal and HR.
Lawdy lawdy, regardless a grave injustice has occurred with ALL our pension
No one has found out if that Rascal Gary Christopher or Brother Paul Nebo, Mike Crews, Sue Longcore withdrew their retirement or rolled it in to something else when they parted the murky waters of SRHS? This is the $150 million dollar question. Please leave kitty and Cisco alone. They put in their years regardless and whatever deal the good doctor made was not their doing
Now to take me an afternoon nap, nothing like a full belly and warm sunshine on your face in the afternoon
Grandpa Grimm:
Me tinks you may have suffered a sun stroke with yo’ rectummendation we ought to leave Cisco, Kitty and the “good doctor” alone.
I don’t know Cisco and Kitty and these are not personal attacks but a search for the truth as to the causes of why SRHS is insolvent beyond the general consensus of politico corruption. If Cisco and Kitty and the “good doctor” received preferential treatment and other “good” doctors/employees got sweet heart deals all at the expense of the pension pool which was owned by all employees and retirees; then it needs to be brought into the light and determined who or what politicos provided such deals.
Especially if the pension plan is eventually refinanced on the backs of Miss. taxpayers then reforms to the pension plan need to be made accordingly to the truths exposed.
Please come out of the sun Grandpa or yo’ gunna have to change yo’ name from Grandpa Grimm to Grandpa Generosity and yo’ Truth TV bedtime stories are going to morph into vanilla tales of the Rich and Famous.
If y’all are so dumb you cannot understand what Cisco explained, you need to stay off slab with your comments. I can see he will not dignify himself any further by tesponding to your WRONG accusations. Do I need to explain it to you in grammars school terms. They DID NOT get a total of 32.5 yrs of service in the SRHS pension plan. We barely know these 2 individuals but feel compelled to defend them. Y’all need to reread his post, particularly the 2nd paragraph. Obviously, you are confused so you need to SHUT UP! As Douglas Handshoe said, Cisco explained it well. Stop trying to alienate the retirees from each other with your inaccuracies.
Barbara and Clifton
I don’t think you understand what the point is.
You both worked your 30 years and retired per the guidelines if the pension plan.
Let’s say employee A has worked at Srhs for 22 years but has not reached age 65. Employee A could not have retired and started drawing their pension.
Next you have employee B who has only worked at Srhs for 12 years but by virtue of the deal his previous employer made with Srhs all the years that he worked for said doctor counts towards his seniority. Employee B can retire because ALL of his time counts; he has technically 32 years but has only worked for Srhs 11 years. Employee B is also not 65 yoa yet he gets to retire and draw a pension while employee A has worked 22 years and cannot retire.
Don’t you see how this could be considered preferential treatment? ALL employees need to be be treated equally.
We’re they employees when they cut that deal or induced to become an employee because of that offer? The answer is the latter. They made a good deal for themselves, I don’t see how anyone could hold that against them.
I agree with Doug,
What is the point of buying a practice in such a way that all the employees feel cheated and leave. Granted, if the employees that moved over, had no pension plan at their previous employer, I can see that they did well. But than so did the Doctor that who sold his practice. If the hospital did a poor job of valuating the actual long term cost of the buyout, that is hardly the fault of those who were “bought out” and its not up to the Doctor to worry about that either.
Barbara and Clifton Jones :
I support the idea that the SRHS employees/retirees should unite or be divided and conquered individually. But those who are leading the fight better be ” Snow White” and without the slightest pension blemish or your fight will be jeopardized and compromised by your opponents.
And Pardon me but your rudeness to tell me to ” shut up” leads me to believe you do not want to read what Cisco and Kitty actually wrote in comments in their own words which I again quoted which states they got credit for PRIVATE employment from 1982- 2003 in the PUBLIC SRHS pension plan .So if you want to seal your ears and defend people who ‘… you don’t really know …. ‘ ( but people you support because they support your fight) then you have a right to do that . But don’t infringe on my right to ask questions concerning what appears to be a loophole or unequal treatment in a PUBLIC pension plan whose pension pool does not belong to politicos but actually belongs to all contributing employees and retirees.
And I will choose to remain a doubting “Thomas” until I see Cisco and Kitty answer some simple questions and MORE IMPORTANTLY see what the pension plan schedule payment is for a person vested for 11 years compared to what the pension schedule provides for a person with 32.5 years of continuous service. I can’t visualize that the life time total schedule payments would be the same money amounts but since I am not a pension player I invite someone with knowledge of pension schedule at SRHS to provide answers.
And again for those comments that look upon this one case of possible pension inequity as peanuts toward a 100 million deficit, I opine if the pension plan is to again be funded on the backs of the Miss. taxpayers then all unequal loopholes need to be reformed or your resurrected pension will again fail . And the way you are supporting Cisco and Kitty’s comments based solely on their vigorous efforts for such refunding you wouldn’t want it to fail again due to unaddressed loopholes – would you ?
Oh, I absolutely agree that if the courts are forced to apply equity to the situation…wait, who are we kidding, WHEN the courts are forced to apply equity…folks ought to get, under equity and not law (i.e., contracts), that to which is equitable under the liquidation process. But that is a whole different matter from what got the pension into the mess that now makes it a near-certainty that an equitable remedy of settlement is needed. There is a difference between cause and resolution.
Justice, you don’t understand, Cisco & Kitty’s # of years service beginning 1/1/82 under Dr McCloskey transferred and continued under Dr. McCloskey (possibly he had a pension for them, I have no idea) NOT said SRHS pension. Their retirement under SRHS plan began after their 3 month probationary period which was on 11/2/03. ( Dr McCloskey’s practice was bought on 8/1/03). They are expecting rightfully so (read his response again) 11 yrs of service pay which should equal approx 18% of their salaries. I had 20yrs of service & am not 65 yr old. Again, read Cisco’s response, there was no special deal given. He & Kiity just want their 11 yrs of service as I want my 20 yrs & not what we contributed plus a lil interest.
Mr Lockemuptight, I base my argument in their behalf on what Cisco wrote. It’s clear to us but maybe not to you. Please reread Cisco’s response very slowly & I think you may get a better understanding of what they are fighting for…11yrs of service under the SRHS pension plan.
I think at this juncture we are going to have to agree to disagree.
You can retire at SRHS once you are vested which is 10 yrs of service & age minimum age of 60 with a retirement benefits. Cisco & Kitty have 11 yrs & that is what they are fighting for & should get.
We have a letter and my significant other says it was even published in the sun herald that says anyone in that lookback period Cisco speaks of where they were not yet vested as of three years ago get treated like a current employee and gets a reduced retirement but not til age 65 and it is for life. If they want their contributions back they get that, but if they are 65 they can start getting paid immediately just not as high as it was and more like what memorial does the way she explained it to me. Don’t be disengenuous. You aren’t getting a full retirement like the guys in 1983 did, which is wrong and terrible, but you are getting a hell of a lot more than your contribution back. Let’s be honest here because we don’t want to be like the dog that had meat in his mouth and looked Into the reflection to try to get two mouthfuls and dropped the one he had and ended up with nothing. Take the money and run as the Steve Miller Band says.
Not being disingenuous, I (Barbara) am in the look back phase & I am going to be treated as a current employee not a retiree although I am retired. I will get only what I contributed with a lil interest. This is how Cisco & Kitty are being treated. My husband (Clifton) is on the employee retirement committee of SRHS. On March 9th, he provide the BOS with the formula comparing the amount of the lump sum payout vs. the retirement benefit over life expectancy (based on social security). The formula is what Lee Bonds provided the committee back on Nov 21st with Kevin Holland in attendance. It Is complicated: Pv=Fv divided by (1+ i) n power
I will provide examples (the financial differences) between accepting a lump sum vs receiving you lifetime benefit per formula:
1) 65 yr old male, 84.4 yrs life expectancy
$63,588.56 vs. $338,258.00
Payment would equal 3.65 yrs of retirement benefit.
2) 60 yr female, 86.2 yrs life expectancy
$47,772.03 vs. $456,823.00
Payment would equal 2.73 yrs of retirement benefit.
Anyone would be a fool in my opinion to take the lump sum. It is also very unfair to current SRHS emplyees.
Clifton,
I am confused on where the “look back” language is coming from. I have a copy of the Retirement plan document and from what I read..p XI-3 the first tier of distribution upon termination of the plan “First, to that portion of each individual’s accrued benefit derived from Member contributions” . Accrued benefit derived from Member contributions as defined on p I-1 “shall mean an annual amount of Retirement Benefit to which the Member would be entitled commencing at age sixty-five(65) in the mode of a single-life annuity equal to his Accumulated Contributions with interest compounded annually projected to his Normal Retirement Date at the rate of five percent (5%) per annum and multiplied by ten percent (10%), …” Anyone with more than 10 years of service is considered vested with “Accrued Retirement Benefit Derived from Member Contributions”….so where is everyone getting the division between those currently receiving benefits and those retired but not yet receiving benefits. Both categories have “Accrued Retirement Benefit Derived From Member Contributions” that would share equally in the first tier of distributions. Can you shed some light on this division for me.
This is Barbara Jones, Clifton has asked me to clarify something in my most recent post. The formula WAS NOT quoted by Lee Bond per se. At the emplyee’s retirement committee meeting on Nov 21, 2014, Lee did say that the “present value of money” would be used in calculating retiree’s lump sum payout made by SRHS. He also said the interest rate used in the calculation would be 9%. Clifton researched the formula & made his calculations base on that information supplied by Lee Bond. The calculations stated above are accurate.
Later I will tell you what I learned from the horse’s mouth (Cisco & Kitty) about their SRHS hospital retirement pension. I asked them this afternoon while we were picketing & received a full explanation. I am very busy right now but please stay tuned.
Lee Bond? Formerly of IP Casino (Boyd) Lee Bond? Him, I’ve heard of, and I guess I “knew” he had moved to SRHS, but really didn’t think of him as being involved in sorting out the pension mess. If that is who you SRHS folks are pinning your hopes on, it just keeps getting worse and worse.
Here is some info from when good ol’ Lee got an award a couple of years ago from the Sun Herald:
“He is an Ocean Springs native, a Summa Cum Laude graduate of the University of South Alabama, a CPA (***Nope – his ticket got pulled. What is it about these folks losing their licenses?) and licensed General Contractor (***Not according to the MSBOC – it sounded odd, so I checked – msboc.org) who recently became the Executive Director of Finance for Singing River Health Systems. Prior to that he was Vice President of Property Operations at IP Casino Resort where he was responsible for finance, strategic planning, design and construction, and worked closely with the owners to encourage heavy reinvestment not just in bricks and mortar, but also in the community. He also owns and operates a regional contracting firm, L.L. Bond & Company, (*** located at 5500 Ritcher Road, Ocean Springs, MS 39564, with several other companies) which has removed more slabs and dilapidated homes on the Gulf Coast than any other firm. His voluntary leadership work includes directorships at the Jackson County Chamber of Commerce, Bacot-McCarty Foundation (***I think he took Scott Walker’s spot – how appropriate), Audubon Society and Seashore United Methodist Assembly, among others.” Let’s just say that from what I’ve heard, him being involved does not bode well for SRHS.
and here’s a blurb from the January 23, 2015 Becker’s Hospital CFO, in the “CFOs making the news this week” section: “2. Pascagoula, Miss.-based Singing River Health System CFO Lee Bond was in the news this week as the system refused to publicly release his annual conflict-of-interest forms, which are filed by health system executives and boards of trustees.”
and a little more about him being a high-flying licensed contractor, from the OCTOBER 18, 2012 State of Louisiana, STATE LICENSING BOARD FOR CONTRACTORS REVISED AGENDA, COMMERCIAL BOARD MEETING: “L.L. Bond & Company, Inc., 5500 Ritcher Road, Ocean Springs, MS 39564. Application is being made for the classification of Building Construction. Exemption of examination for Louis Lee Bond III, Member, and the 60 day waiting period is being requested. This company has been licensed with the Mississippi Board of Contractors since 2008.” However, there seems to be no license for him or the company or **even the alleged license number** in Louisiana (or Mississippi), however.
Licensed in Mississippi:
L.L. BOND & COMPANY, INC.
License Number 16583-MC
http://www.msboc.us/Detail.cfm?ContractorID=19477&ContractorType=Commercial&varDataSource=BOC
Possibly licensed in Louisiana as well. Proverbs 3:6.
http://cityofno.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=1614&meta_id=215124
Very curious and my mistake as to Bond never being licensed. When you type any of the information from the link you posted into the search at the MSBOC, nothing shows up. Notice that the link you posted indicates the license “expired” in Jan. 2015; I wonder if the search database only returns current licenses (see below about LA)? How did you find the listing? The listing you posted shows a “Rodney Felps” as the 2nd qualifying name. The name meant nothing to me, so I typed it into Google. There is a Rodney Felps who is still with the IP listed as the Facilities Director/Construction Manager. The second link shows a LA license number, but again, I could get nothing to come up with the LA contractor’s board search, but is clearly says it only shows current licenses. Also note the money was coming from the ICC fund (another boondoggle-ish Katrina-related “public money” fund, actually somewhat appropriate to be discussed on a website called “Slabbed”).
In any case, the contractor licensing question was not what made me dubious of Bond’s ability to help sort out the SRHS and SRHS pension mess. I cannot go into too many specifics; I know of him, but do not know him personally. There may be public information out there if anyone wants to search for it and post it. The bottom line is given what I do know and have of heard of his “interesting” career, and who he has ties to, it makes me dubious. That said, I would accept that he had no role in getting the situation into the mess its in (and personally doubt he did have any role), only that I doubt he can truly help get it out of that mess. I will say this – if he was claiming to be licensed and was not, or that there were other issues with his license, I would not have been shocked.
I agree that this side business L.L. Bond & Company, Inc probably isn’t central to the SRHS/Jackson County financial fiasco. However, when on Slabbed, details details details.
I don’t remember exactly how I located the license on the MS site. I did not find it with a number of searches. One of the things I failed to notice was that the expiration date of the license had passed.
” Also note the money was coming from the ICC fund (another boondoggle-ish Katrina-related “public money” fund, actually somewhat appropriate to be discussed on a website called “Slabbed”).”
I did notice that when I posted the links. I also failed to notice the word “Yes” next to the word “Minority”. The entire contents of the link are copied below. Perhaps someone can inform as to what this means.
http://www.msboc.us/Detail.cfm?ContractorID=19477&ContractorType=Commercial&varDataSource=BOC
L.L. BOND & COMPANY, INC.
License Number 16583-MC
Address 5500 RITCHER ROAD
City OCEAN SPRINGS
State MS
Miss. County JACKSON
Zip 39564
Phone 228-875-6641
Fax 228-875-6641
DBA Name
Expiration Date 01/14/2015
Minority Yes
Class(es)
Classification Qualifying Name
BUILDING CONSTRUCTION LOUIS L. BOND/ RODNEY FELPS
EXCAVATION, GRADING & DRAINAGE LOUIS L. BOND/ RODNEY FELPS
Officers
Name Title
L. LEE BOND PRESIDENT
TAMMY L. BOND VICE-PRESIDENT
To all of you who think the Aguilar’s are getting away with highway robbery, particularly, married into this, justice, lockemuptight, & dirt hauler, they qualify & are receiving retirement benefits based on 11yrs of service which equates to 17.88% of their salary. The benefits that carried over from Dr. McCloskey’s practice was their 23 yrs of service; therefore, making them eligible for their 25 yr pin 2 yrs after being bought by SRHS, they did not have to start at ground zero. Also, their PTO was based on their 23yrs of service. They became a participant in the SRHS pension plan in November, 2003 & retired in September 2014, totaling 11yrs of service.
Cisco will not respond on this blog to any questions but said if you would like to talk with him you can attend the next protest scheduled for this Friday at SRH between 2p-4p. He will be glad to answer your questions.
Barbara:
You and Cisco should not be narrative leaders in an equity battle as you all are the most smokin’ mirrors duo that I have read in many a moon.
First Cisco says his pension was based on 32.5 yrs of service. then you say no it is based on 11 years of employment in SRHS then now you say his PTO ( like we are supposed to know what that means) was based on 23 years of service then in following sentence they were participants after 11 years of service.
Know what – God bless and good luck to you all and continue your fight and I pray that someone somewhere at sometime will understand your arguments.
There have been a few times doing Slabbed that we’ve had a thread that devolved into something so imbecillic as this one Locke where retirees are criticized for drawing the pension they earned. Plan participants bickering over who is more entitled to legitimently earned benefits is straight out of elementary school and I’m surprised you’re taking part. I imagine Ms. Taylor is having a good laugh at your expense.
Holy Gunsmoke Gunfight Reruns Batman;
I thought they quit playing reruns of Gunsmoke but evidently they are allowing Cisco and Kitty to still play with guns ” loaded” with aimless words on the internet
It’s unfortunate that a lot of Slabbers were misled down the road of confusing pension details that created suspicions of pension inequality.
Simply put Cisco’s misdirected statements about how he worked 20 +years for a doctor whose practice and employees were purchased by SRHS and that after working 11 years in SRHS such combined employment time gave him “…..32.5 years of continuos credited service into the SYSTEM” . To say such statements were misleading is even a gross understatement.
All he had to say was ” I worked 11 years directly for SRHS, paid into a pension plan and desire to capture 18 % of my original salary as a monthly retirement entitlement- end of sentence, end of paragraph, end of story and end of controversy – as there would have never been any doubts by any reasonable Slabbed reader.
As a vocal leader fighting for a cause worthy of justice he/she should be able to articulate words in a way to support the cause and not introduce misleading information. Cisco should stick to holding up sticks with signs on them and he’ll continue to be a formidable force for pension justice.
And Batman , I’m surprised you don’t see that such blogging comments of confusing misinformation detracts and misdirects the attention and blogging efforts of sincere Slabbers who seek equality for ALL employees and retirees – even in a screwed up pension system rocked with political corruption.
P.S. After viewing “Barbie” ‘s picture , Ms. Taylor deserves a few laughs at Slabbed’s expense strictly for the inflated, “Harvard” health of her psyche. He, He,he
Lockemuptight, you are sooo d??n dumb if you can’t understand Cisco’s explanation. You sure don’t need to be telling him how to write it. Also, if you don’t know what PTO is then stop commenting on things you have no knowledge/understanding, ie: SRHS pension, benefits etc. Obviously, this is why you can’t comprehend what he wrote. Again, I invite you to visit him on Friday at protest face to face (not hiding behind your pseudonym). Of course you won’t because you rather belittle him & Kitty (wrongfully)behind the scenes. Which says a lot for your character. I will no longer respond to such idiots as you, just as Cisco has decided. Douglas Handshoe, to lockemuptight’s disappointment, we retirees/employees are not divided but United!
Barbara :
Good luck with your pension ,thank you for your angry ugly words as they only show your deserving character and you better get back out on the picket lines with the other Gunsmoke characters, Cisco and Miss Kitty , cause time is short and soon it will be High Noon with Lightin’ Guice and the other fast draw politicos.
If you had followed my earlier posts you would know I have been sympathetic to the SRHS employees/retirees plight from the start, was only trying to verify that all employees were being treated fairly – especially those who claim to be leaders for public refunding of the pension. But now I could not give a damn cause you all are hopeless causes and will reap what you deserve.